DOCSLIB.ORG

1. Those Who Were Suspicious of Or Against Nicaea: A. Homoiousians

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1. Those Who Were Suspicious of Or Against Nicaea: A. Homoiousians 1 1. Those who were suspicious of or against Nicaea: a. Homoiousians (“of like substance”, “like in all things”) (Ayres, Nicaea, 149ff; Kelly, Creeds, 288; Kelly, Doctrine, 250; Meredith, Cappadocians, 102f) • In reaction to the “blasphemy of Sirmium,” theologians of this orientation met in 358 under the leadership of Basil of Ancyra and produced a document stating categorically that there is a similarity between the Father and the Son. The Son’s ousia is clearly next to the Father’s ousia and not among the ousiai of creatures. However the Son’s and the Father’s substances (ousiai) are not identical, but alike. • Against Arianism, but also uneasy with Nicaea, this large group was troubled by the Nicene term homoousios, thinking that it led to a Sabellianian denial of any distinction between Father and Son. (They clearly suspected pro-Nicene bishop Marcellus of Ancyra of Sabellianism and repeatedly asked western theologians to condemn him.) Ø Against Arianism: Christ is not a creature but Son of the Father, for ‘creator and creature are one thing; Father and Son another’; Ø Against Marcellus: The Son was not simply an ‘energy’ of the Father but ‘a substance (ousia) like the Father’ (Kelly, Doctrine, 250). • Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, George of Laodicea, Basil of Ancyra. The Cappadocians would emerge from this group. b. Homoians (homoios—“like” without any further specification), Anti-Nicaea: • An alliance of Arian theologians emerged following the Council of Sirmium in 357 and had a considerable influence on emperor Constantius. • It rejected all theologies that see commonality of essence between Father and Son. Homoians were willing to talk of the Son being ‘like’ the Father, or ‘like according to the Scriptures’ but all further technical terminology was avoided—although a clear subordination emphasis was understood to be implied by ‘like’’ (Ayres, Nicaea, 138). They would support Heterousisans when pressed. Valens and Ursacius led a western group (cf. Rimini, Ayres, Nicaea, 160 & 170); Acacius of Caesarea and Eudoxius of Antioch later of Constantinople led an eastern group (Cf. Council of Seleucia, Sept. 359, Ayres, Nicaea, 161f). The Emperor Constantius favored the Homoians, hoping that their theology of “the unspecified like” would unite a majority of Christians. • The Niké/Constantinople Creed of 360 was decidedly Homoian and became the official creed of the empire for two decades. c. Heterousians/Anomoeans (anomoios—“unlike”), Anti-Nicaea: • Led by radical homoians Aetius and Eunomius, they argued that the Son was ‘unlike the Father in every respect.’ The Son is not of the same substance (homoousios) nor of a similar substance (homoiousios), but rather of a different substance altogether. The Son is a ‘creature of the uncreated.’ Cf. Kelly, Creeds, 283; Eunomius—Kelly, Doctrine, 249; Ayres, Nicaea, 144f; Zizioulas, ???). • Eunomius and Gregory: cf. Meredith, Cappadocians, 64ff; Zizioulas; cf. Ayres, Early Chr. Lit, 433) • v 2. Pro-Nicaea but against the divinity of the Spirit (Ayres, Early Chr. Lit, 440; Nicaea, 214, 253) a. In the late 370s there emerged a group, mostly of former Homoiousians, named after Macedonius, (Bishop of Constantinople) that accepted the divinity of the Son along Nicene lines, but resisted the move toward recognizing the divinity of the Spirit. b. They were present at the Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (381) but withdrew. According to Kelly, the lack of the use of the word homoousios to describe the relation between the Holy Spirit and the Father and the Son in the creed of Constantinople (381) is due to an attempt to mollify the Macedonians (Kelly, Creeds, 328f). 3. Confusion, controversies and condemnations: a. Athanasius’ predecessor, Alexander, had come to an agreement with the Melitians by which they would be incorporated into a unified Egyptian church. Athanasius didn’t seem happy with that agreement and after his election as bishop of Alexander (328) he “encouraged his supporters to act 2 violently against (them), on occasion barring them from churches, having some arrested, and at least acquiescing in the beating of some…. (He) earned the opprobrium of many eastern bishops and seems to have made little direct attempt to defend himself from the accusations. At some point in the early 330s the Melitians, as part of a campaign to elicit support against Athanasius, found an ally in some of the Eusebians and probably in Eusebius of Nicomedia himself” (Ayres, Nicaea, 103). • Summoned to appear before a council in Tyre (335), attention focused on the charges of his inciting violence, although several of his investigators also opposed him on theological grounds. When his accusers “charged him with interrupting the grain supply from Egypt”, Constantine turned against him. Athanasius was exiled to Trier (Ayres, Nicaea, 102-3). b. Meanwhile, Marcellus was condemned for harboring Sabellian ideas and deposed at a meeting of bishops in Constantinople in 336. c. Following Constantine’s death in 337, “all exiled bishops were allowed to return to their sees, Constantine II writing personally to the Alexandrians about Athanasius…. The civil banishment of these bishops was revoked, but their ecclesiastical, conciliar depositions remained in force. Bishops who wished to ignore the latter frequently chose to take advantage of the former. Participants from all sides in the debate could and did complain to whichever authority best served their purposes. In 338 Athanasius held a council in Alexandria which circulated a dossier directed against his enemies but with little consequence. In 339 imperial soldiers arrived to enforce Constantius’ approval of the Eusebians’ reiteration of Athanasius’ deposition at the council of Antioch (338/9). Athanasius then made his way to Rome, as did Marcellus, who had also been deposed again” (Ayres, Nicaea, 103-4). • It was during his stay in Rome in 339-340, that Athanasius wrote the first of his three Orations Against the Arians. He begins by “presenting Arius as the originator of a new heresy and all later proponents of such a theology as appropriately designated ‘Arians.’ He had referred to his opponents as ‘Arian madmen’ in a 338 letter, but in a letter produced by his Alexandrian council Athanasius began to speak of an Arian conspiracy (Ayres, Nicaea, 107-8). o While Athanasius’ account of Arianism was to be “of considerable importance in the west,” in other areas of the Mediterranean Arius’ ideas were “treated largely as one half of a formal pairing of extremes: ‘orthodoxy’ avoids both Arius and Sabellius” (Cf. Cappadocians. Ayres, Nicaea, 108-9) d. “Athanasius appealed to Julius of Rome in 339/40 by using his strategy of narrating a theological conspiracy of ‘Arians.’ Pope Julius 1 convoked a small council of about 50 bishops in 341, at which Athanasius and Marcellus were pronounced guiltless and readmitted to full communion (Kelly, Creeds, 264; Ayres, Nicaea, 109). e. Pope Julius 1 then sent a letter to ‘those around Eusebius’ announcing his council’s decisions. The letter showed ‘a strong influence of the emerging Athanasian account of ‘Arianism’. In it Julius charges the Eusebians with accepting ‘Arians’ into communion despite their condemnation at Nicaea. Much of the focus in the first half of his long letter is on “the perceived attempt of the Eusebians to ignore or even overturn the decisions and canons of Nicaea. … Relations between Rome and the Eusebians were shaped for many years by Athanasius’ account of events” (Ayres, Nicaea, 109. • Frend, Rise, 529 characterizes Julius’ letter as “outraged complaint in every line” and an extraordinary “claim to speak to his colleagues on the authority of Peter and nothing else.” f. The Dedication Council: (Kelly, Creeds, 263ff; Ayres, Nicaea, 117ff; Frend, Rise, 530ff) In 341 a group of some 90 bishops met in Antioch to dedicate a church whose construction was begun by Emperor Constantine. Here they also discussed Julius’s letter that vindicated Athanasius and Marcellus and that accused them of accommodating Arians. Eusebius of Nicomedia (newly named bishop of Constantinople), Acacius of Caesarea, Asterius and the emperor Constantius were present. Four creed-like statements were produced: • “The first occurs in a letter which begins with a preamble making clear one point that had come to anger the Eusebians: ‘we have not been followers of Arius—how could bishops, such as we, follow a presbyter—nor did we receive any other faith beside that which has been handed down….’ They also assert that they were within their rights to judge the faith of Arius and admit him to communion” (Ayres, Nicaea, 117-8). • The second is a more formal statement of faith and is known as the “Dedication” creed (See Kelly, 3 Creeds, 268-270 for the creed). This creed has a clear anti-Sabellian and anti-Marcellan thrust, seen, for example, in the insistence that, as written in Matthew 28:19, the three names—Father, Son and Holy Spirit— “are not given lightly or idly but signify exactly the particular hypostasis and order and glory of each who are named, so that they are three in hypostasis but one in agreement” (Quoted in Ayres, Nicaea, 118; cf. Kelly, Creeds, 270). o Nicaea itself was not yet so established as a definitive statement of the Christian faith that questions of other creeds supplanting it are warranted. Yet this creed “almost certainly intended to offer a better and clearer affirmation of faith than Nicaea” (Ayres, Nicaea, 119). Ø [On the Nicene Creed immediately being an officially accepted statement of faith and its relationship with the council of Constantinople in 381, see Kelly, Creeds, 313-331, and discussion on Constantinople 381, below] o Missing in it is “Nicaea’s insistence on the Son being from the Father’s ousia: the already contested nature of this theology in 325 can only have been enhanced by controversy over Marcellus” (Ayres, Nicaea, 120).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: the Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Honors Theses Student Research 5-6-2021 Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State Keeley Harris University of Richmond Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses Part of the Political Science Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Harris, Keeley, "Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State" (2021). Honors Theses. 1577. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1577 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State By Keeley Harris Honors Thesis Submitted to: Jepson School of Leadership Studies University of Richmond Richmond, VA May 6, 2021 Advisor: Dr. Kristin M. S. Bezio Harris 1 Abstract Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State Keeley Harris Committee members: Dr. Kristin M. S. Bezio, Dr. George R. Goethals and Dr. Douglas L. Winiarski This research focuses on a sect of Christian thinkers who originated in mid-16th century Poland called Socinians. They had radical Christian views built upon ideas from humanism and the Protestant Reformation, including Anti-Trinitarianism and rejecting the divinity of Christ.
    [Show full text]
  • Abraham (Hermit) 142F. Aristode 160 Acacius (Bishop Atarbius (Bishop Of
    INDEX Abraham (hermit) 142f. Aristode 160 Acacius (bishop Atarbius (bishop of Caesarea) 80f., 86f., of Neocaesarea) 109f., 127 91 Athanasius 63, 67ff., 75 Acacius (bishop Athanasius of Balad 156, 162 of Beroea) 142ff. Athenodorus (brother Aelianus 109 of Gregory al-Farabi 156 Thaumaturgus) 103, 105, Alexander (bishop 133 of Comana) I 26f., 129, Athens 120 132 Augustine 9-21, 70 Alexander (of the Cassiciacum Dialogues 9, 15ff. "Non-Sleepers" Corifessions 9-13, 15, monastery) 203, 211 18, 20f. Alexander (patriarch De beata vita 16ff. of Antioch) 144 De ordine 16ff. Alexander of Retractions 19 Abonoteichos 41 Soliloquies 19f. Alexander Severus Aurelian (emperor (emperor 222-235) 47 270-275) 121 Alexandria 37, 39f., 64, Auxentios 205 82, 101, 104, 120, Babai 172 n. II, 126f., 129 173ff. n. 92, 143, Babylas 70 156, 215 Baghdad 156 Alexandrian Christology 68 Bardesanism/Bardesanites 147 Amaseia 128 Barhadbeshabba 'Arbaya 145 Ambrose 70, 91 Barnabas 203 n. 39 Basil of Caeserea 109f., 117, Anastasios (monk) 207 121ff., 126f., Anastasius (= Magundat) 171 131, 157, Ancyra 113 166 Andrew Kalybites 207 Basilides 32, 37ff. Andrew the Fool 203 Beroea 141, 142 Annisa 112f. Berytus 101, 103f., Antioch 82, 105, 120 I I If., 155, 160, 215 Caesarea (Cappadocia) 129 Antiochene theology 72f., 143 Caesarea (Palestine) 80ff., 87, Antiochos the African 205 91, 92, 100, Antony 63,69f., 101, 103ff., 75f. 120 Antony / Antoninus Cappadocia 46ff., 53, (pupil of Lucian) 65 122 Apelles 51 Carpocrates 32, 39, 41 Arius/ Arianism/ Arians 65ff., 80ff., Carthage 47,49, 51, 92, 148 53ff., 57f. 224 INDEX Cataphrygian(s) 50ff., 56, 59 David of Thessalonike 205 Chaereas (comes) 140 Dcmosthenes (vicarius Chalcedon 75 of Pontica) III Chosroes II 17Iff., 175, Diogenes (bishop 177, I 79f., of Edessa) 144 182, 184, Dionysius (pope 259~269) 106 188 Doctrina Addai 91 n.
    [Show full text]
  • Exiling Bishops: the Policy of Constantius II
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Classical Studies Faculty Publications Classical Studies 2014 Exiling Bishops: The olicP y of Constantius II Walter Stevenson University of Richmond, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/classicalstudies-faculty- publications Part of the History of Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Stevenson, Walt. "Exiling Bishops: The oP licy of Canstantius II." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 68 (2014): 7-27. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Classical Studies at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Classical Studies Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Exiling Bishops: The Policy of Constantius II Walt Stevenson onstantius II was forced by circumstances to all instances in which Constantius II exiled bishops Cmake innovations in the policy that his father and focus on a sympathetic reading of his strategy.2 Constantine had followed in exiling bishops. While Though the sources for this period are muddled and ancient tradition has made the father into a sagacious require extensive sorting, a panoramic view of exile saint and the son into a fanatical demon, recent schol- incidents reveals a pattern in which Constantius moved arship has tended to stress continuity between the two past his father’s precedents to mold a new, intelligent regimes.1 This article will attempt to gather
    [Show full text]
  • Eusebius and His Ecclesiastical History
    1 Eusebius and His Ecclesiastical History Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History (HE) is the most important of his many books. It created a new literary genre that would have a long and influential history. In an often-quoted statement, F. C. Baur called Eusebius the father of ecclesiastical his- tory, just as Herodotus was the father of historical writing in general.1 The Ecclesi- astical History is our single most important source for recovering the history of the first three centuries of Christianity. And it is the centerpiece of a corpus of writings in which Eusebius created a distinctive vision of the place of the Christian church in world history and God’s providential plan. A book of such significance has attracted an enormous body of commentary and analysis driven by two rather different motives. One was the value of the HE as a documentary treasure trove of partially or completely lost works. For a long time, that was the primary driver of scholarly interest. The past two generations have seen the emergence of a second trend that focuses on Eusebius as a figure in his own right, a writer of exceptional range, creativity, and productivity, and an actor on the ecclesiastical and political stage.2 How, for example, did current events shape the way Eusebius thought and wrote about the church’s past? And what can his con- struction of the past tell us in turn about Christian consciousness and ambition during a time of enormous transition? Seen from that angle, the HE becomes not a source for history but itself an artifact of history, a hermeneutical redirection that will be applied to other works of Christian historiography in this book.3 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Language and Theology in St Gregory of Nyssa
    Durham E-Theses Language and theology in St Gregory of Nyssa Neamµu, Mihail G. How to cite: Neamµu, Mihail G. (2002) Language and theology in St Gregory of Nyssa, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4187/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk University of Durham Faculty of Arts Department of Theology The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Language and Theology in St Gregory of Nyssa Mihail G. Neamtu St John's College September 2002 M.A. in Theological Research Supervisor: Prof Andrew Louth This dissertation is the product of my own work, and the work of others has been properly acknowledged throughout. Mihail Neamtu Language and Theology in St Gregory of Nyssa MA (Research) Thesis, September 2002 Abstract This MA thesis focuses on the work of one of the most influential and authoritative theologians of the early Church: St Gregory of Nyssa (f396).
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 4 the CHURCH in the THIRD CENTURY Roman
    The Early Church Christopher K. Lensch, S.T.M. Western Reformed Seminary (www.wrs.edu) CHAPTER 4 THE CHURCH IN THE THIRD CENTURY Roman emperors in the first half of the century Severi dynasty 1. Septimius Severus (193-211) [already discussed under second century] renewed persecution in AD 200: Leonidas (Origen’s father) beheaded Potamiaena (young girl) boiled in oil Petpetua and baby burned; her slave Felicitas killed also died on campaign in Britain 2. Caracalla (211-217) brutal and cruel; murdered family members, including brother Geta; favored the army; built baths; extended Roman citizenship to all, in order to tax all; dropped persecution in middle of reign; was assassinated by his army on a Parthian campaign 3. Macrinus (217-218) prefect of the guard; removed by Caracalla’s cousin and his family 4. Heliogabalus (218-222) cousin of Caracalla, controlled by his mother Soaemias and grandmother Maesa (Caracalla’s aunt); real name was Elagabalus; Latin authors name Heliogabalus 14-year old priest of Syrian sun god; brought Syrian “Baal” (conical black stone) to Rome; unbelievable sexual depravity; grandmother convinced him to adopt cousin Alexander; slain by Guard 5. Alexander Severus (222-235) 4.1 14 years old; well trained and prepared; ruled by mother; temperate and modest, opposite of Heliogabalus; private chapel icons: Jupiter, Orpheus, Apollonius, Abraham, Christ; *put golden rule in house and many public buildings; very efficient administrator, lowered taxes; weak against Germans, bribed them; assassinated in tent by army, under Maximinus Anarchy; army control 6. Maximinus (235-238) huge soldier (they say 8 feet tall); hated culture and education; never entered Rome; confiscated property of upper classes; murdered by soldiers he punished 7.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT the Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories Of
    ABSTRACT The Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret Scott A. Rushing, Ph.D. Mentor: Daniel H. Williams, Ph.D. This dissertation analyzes the transposition of the apostolic tradition in the fifth-century ecclesiastical histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret. In the early patristic era, the apostolic tradition was defined as the transmission of the apostles’ teachings through the forms of Scripture, the rule of faith, and episcopal succession. Early Christians, e.g., Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, believed that these channels preserved the original apostolic doctrines, and that the Church had faithfully handed them to successive generations. The Greek historians located the quintessence of the apostolic tradition through these traditional channels. However, the content of the tradition became transposed as a result of three historical movements during the fourth century: (1) Constantine inaugurated an era of Christian emperors, (2) the Council of Nicaea promulgated a creed in 325 A.D., and (3) monasticism emerged as a counter-cultural movement. Due to the confluence of these sweeping historical developments, the historians assumed the Nicene creed, the monastics, and Christian emperors into their taxonomy of the apostolic tradition. For reasons that crystallize long after Nicaea, the historians concluded that pro-Nicene theology epitomized the apostolic message. They accepted the introduction of new vocabulary, e.g. homoousios, as the standard of orthodoxy. In addition, the historians commended the pro- Nicene monastics and emperors as orthodox exemplars responsible for defending the apostolic tradition against the attacks of heretical enemies. The second chapter of this dissertation surveys the development of the apostolic tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • St Basil's Contribution to the Trinitarian Doctrine: A
    ST BASIL’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE: A SYNTHESIS OF GREEK PAIDEIA AND THE SCRIPTURAL WORLDVIEW Philip Kariatlis Abstract: St Basil’s contribution to the formulation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity has long been acknowledged in the Christian tradition. Indeed, he was responsible for articulating the ‘orthodox’ vision of God with theological and philosophical originality that truly laid the foundations upon which the way of pondering the Trinitarian mystery in the East was established. His achievement lay in his remarkable ability to ennoble the culture of the day with the Christian message without in any way compromising the latter. This paper explores the Trinitarian theology of St Basil with a view towards highlighting the harmonious synthesis of Greek paideia and the scriptural worldview. ndeniably, the Church’s teaching on the mystery of the Holy Trinity stands at the very heart of Christian belief. Indeed, Uit has rightly been recognised as Christianity’s differentia specifica, namely that specific teaching which clearly distinguishes the 1 Christian faith from all other forms of monotheism. Notwithstanding the importance of this teaching and the fact that it is firmly rooted in the Scriptures, it nevertheless took the early Church many years to acquire a clearly articulated theology of the Trinitarian mystery. The need for precise terminology particularly emerged when the Church had to define with accuracy in what way the one God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – namely, the Father almighty – was related to Jesus Christ – who was professed to be God’s only begotten Son, his eternal Word and Image – PHRONEMA, VOL.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EXEGETICAL ROOTS of TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY MICHAEL SLUSSER Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pa
    Theological Studies 49 (1988) THE EXEGETICAL ROOTS OF TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY MICHAEL SLUSSER Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pa. N RECENT YEARS systematic theologians have been showing increased I interest in studying the doctrine of the Trinity. An integral part of that study should be an exposition of the origins of the doctrine. The question of origins can be posed in an analytical fashion, as Maurice Wiles has done: .. .we seem forced to choose between three possibilities: either (1) we do after all know about the Trinity through a revelation in the form of propositions concerning the inner mysteries of the Godhead; or (2) there is an inherent threefoldness about every act of God's revelation, which requires us to think in trinitarian terms of the nature of God, even though we cannot speak of the different persons of the Trinity being responsible for specific facets of God's revelation; or (3) our Trinity of revelation is an arbitrary analysis of the activity of God, which though of value in Christian thought and devotion is not of essential significance.1 I think that this analytical approach is in important respects secondary to the genetic one. The first Christians spoke about God in the terms which we now try to analyze; surely the reasons why they used those terms are most relevant to a sound analysis. The main words whose usage needs to be fathomed are the Greek words prosöpon, hypostasis, ousia, andphysis.2 Prosöpon is the earliest of these terms to have attained an accepted conventional usage in early Christian speech about God, and therefore the chief determinant of the shape which the complex of terms was to take.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Historical Imagination in Late Antique Iraq
    OXFORD EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES General Editors Gillian Clark Andrew Louth THE OXFORD EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES series includes scholarly volumes on the thought and history of the early Christian centuries. Covering a wide range of Greek, Latin, and Oriental sources, the books are of interest to theologians, ancient historians, and specialists in the classical and Jewish worlds. Titles in the series include: Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Transformation of Divine Simplicity Andrew Radde-Gallwitz (2009) The Asceticism of Isaac of Nineveh Patrik Hagman (2010) Palladius of Helenopolis The Origenist Advocate Demetrios S. Katos (2011) Origen and Scripture The Contours of the Exegetical Life Peter Martens (2012) Activity and Participation in Late Antique and Early Christian Thought Torstein Theodor Tollefsen (2012) Irenaeus of Lyons and the Theology of the Holy Spirit Anthony Briggman (2012) Apophasis and Pseudonymity in Dionysius the Areopagite “No Longer I” Charles M. Stang (2012) Memory in Augustine’s Theological Anthropology Paige E. Hochschild (2012) Orosius and the Rhetoric of History Peter Van Nuffelen (2012) Drama of the Divine Economy Creator and Creation in Early Christian Theology and Piety Paul M. Blowers (2012) Embodiment and Virtue in Gregory of Nyssa Hans Boersma (2013) The Chronicle of Seert Christian Historical Imagination in Late Antique Iraq PHILIP WOOD 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries # Philip Wood 2013 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2013 Impression: 1 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Martyrs, Saints & Prelates of the Syriac Orthodox
    Martyrs, Saints & Prelates of The Syriac Orthodox Church Volume I Fr. K. Mani Rajan, M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D. The Travancore Syriac Orthodox Publishers Kottayam - 686 004 Kerala, India. 2007 1 Martyrs, Saints & Prelates of The Syriac Orthodox Church (Volume I) By Fr. K. Mani Rajan, M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D. First Edition 2007 Copyright Reserved All rights reserved. No reproduction or translation in whole or part is allowed without written permission from the author. Price Rs. 100.00 U.S. $ 10.00 Typesetting and Cover Design by: M/s Vijaya Book House, M.G.University, Athirampuzha Printed at: Dona Colour Graphs, Kottayam Published By: The Travancore Syriac Orthodox Publishers Kottayam - 686 004 Kerala, India. Phone: +91 481 3100179, +91 94473 15914 E-mail: [email protected] Copies: 1000 2 Contents Preface Apostolic Bull of H. H. Patriarch Abbreviations used 1. St. John, the Baptist .................................................. 2. S t . S t e p h e n , t h e Martyr ................................................................................ 3. St. James, the Disciple ............................................... 4. St. James, the First Archbishop of Jerusalem ............ 5. King Abgar V of Urhoy ................................................ 6. St. Mary, the Mother of God ....................................... 7. St. Peter, the Disciple ................................................. 8. St. Paul, the Disciple .............................................................................. 9. St. Mark, the Evangelist ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • SOBORNOST St
    SOBORNOST St. Thomas the Apostle Orthodox Church (301) 638-5035 Church 4419 Leonardtown Road Waldorf, MD 20601 Rev. Father Joseph Edgington, Pastor (703) 532-8017 [email protected] www.apostlethomas.org American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE OF CONSTANTINOPLE Wed: Moleben to the Theotokos 6:00 AM Friday: Moleben to the Cross 6:00 AM Saturday: Confession 5:00 PM, Great Vespers 5:30 PM Sunday: Matins (Orthros) 8:45 AM Children’s Sunday School 9:30 AM Divine Liturgy 10:00 AM. September 15, 2019 – 13th Sunday After Pentecost | Saint Nicetas the Goth | Sunday After the Elevation of the Cross From September 15 until the Leavetaking (September 21), we sing “O come, let us worship and fall down before Christ. O son of God crucified in the flesh, save us who sing to You: Alleluia” at weekday Liturgies following the Little Entrance. (oca.org) Saint Niketas (or Nicetas) was a Goth and soldier who lived on the eastern side of the Danube River within the boundaries of present-day Romania. Bishop Theophilus, the well-known enlightener of the Goths and a participant in the First Ecumenical Synod in 325, converted him to Christianity and baptized him in his youth. Niketas was a devout Orthodox Christian from his youth, and not an Arian as many suppose, for Arianism spread among the Goths through the successor of Theophilus, the bishop Urphilus. Niketas was instructed in the Orthodox faith by Bishop Urphilus (311-383). Urphilus was a native of Cappadocia, who had been captured by the Goths. He was on an embassy to Constantinople when Eusebius of Nicomedia consecrated him bishop of the Goths (341).
    [Show full text]